Linux-Misc Digest #191, Volume #20 Thu, 13 May 99 18:13:11 EDT
Contents:
Re: Pro-Unix vs anti-WinTel ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (Marco Anglesio)
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (Marco Anglesio)
Re: Scrolling continues long after releasing arrow button (Colin Watson)
Call for Papers: 1999 Atlanta Linux Showcase (Jennifer Radtke)
Re: PCMCIA modem won't work (Frank Riha)
Re: car mp3 player (brian moore)
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (Peter Seebach)
Re: emulate a removable media (jik-)
ext2 support for solaris now available (Philip Brown)
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (Greg Yantz)
best distribution (octet)
Re: best distribution (Alex Kaufman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Pro-Unix vs anti-WinTel
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 19:22:39 GMT
[posted & mailed]
Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: On Thu, 13 May 1999 14:54:40 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: wrote:
:> And the problems you've had with ports are what, exactly?
:
: The whole concept of it. The fact that it is cobbled together from a
: zillion different sources. There is no central repository which means
: when any one of the things in ports changes, might as well throw away the
: whole tree.
Boy you're clueless. Ports is probably the only package system that
*does* have a central repository. It's all under CVS with public
access through CVSUP, which makes keeping an upto date ports tree
*trival*. So much so that many, myself included, simply stick the
job in a cron tab:
From my /etc/weekly.local:
/usr/local/bin/cvsup -E -g -Z /usr/share/examples/cvsup/ports-supfile
:> Upgrading the system, or user apps?
:
: Yes.
My mistake; You're less then clueless.
:> If it's the system, what's so hard about sysinstall->Upgrade?
:> -Which, BTW, has *nothing* to do with ports.
:
: On a production machine? I'm sorry, no.
But you would under Linux? You're a trip, really.
:> If it's a user app, what's so hard about cd /usr/ports/foo && make
:> install? This is "too damned hard" how, exactly?
:
: No dependency checking at all.
And full of baseless FUD no less.
Ports is built from the ground up on dependency checking. More over
it doesn't simply blow up when a dependency fails, it can and will
download, build, and install the dependencies for you, no matter how
many layers deep they go.
You have so little clue as to what you speek of it's sad.
:> But you haven't said *why*. Until you do, you're nothing but
:> baseless FUD.
:
: Which is no less than most of the FreeBSD weenies I see running around
: blasting Linux left and right with utter and complete FUD.
Example?
: My *SPECIFIC* problem with ports is no dependency checking at all.
Again, this is *COMPLETELY* false. 100% *BULLSHIT*
: There is no way to install a program and have the libraries associated
: with it be selected and included.
cd /usr/ports/someapp && make install
Bingo, poof, there ya go. That's it, that's all. *All*
dependencies are checked, downloaded, and installed.
Here's an example:
# cd /usr/ports/graphics/gimp1
# make install
>> gimp-1.1.2.tar.gz doesn't seem to exist on this system.
>> Attempting to fetch from ftp://ftp.gimp.org/pub/gimp/unstable/old/v1.1.2/.
Receiving gimp-1.1.2.tar.gz (5263942 bytes): 100%
5263942 bytes transfered in 58.0 seconds (88.61 Kbytes/s)
===> Extracting for gimp-1.1.2
>> Checksum OK for gimp-1.1.2.tar.gz.
===> gimp-1.1.2 depends on executable: gmake - found
===> gimp-1.1.2 depends on shared library: Xpm.4 - found
===> gimp-1.1.2 depends on shared library: aa.1 - found
===> gimp-1.1.2 depends on shared library: jpeg.9 - found
===> gimp-1.1.2 depends on shared library: gtk12.1 - not found
===> Verifying install for gtk12.1 in /usr/ports/x11-toolkits/gtk12
>> gtk+-1.2.1.tar.gz doesn't seem to exist on this system.
>> Attempting to fetch from ftp://ftp.gimp.org/pub/gtk/v1.2/.
Receiving gtk+-1.2.1.tar.gz (2685877 bytes): 100%
.....SNIP.....
: If there is, it sure isn't documented well.
RTFM: man ports
"make install"
Is it really so hard?
: The *ONE* time I had to fight ports to install tk/tcl for another
: application was enough for me to swear off it for good.
Here's your tcl/tk example:
# make install
>> tk8.1b1.tar.gz doesn't seem to exist on this system.
>> Attempting to fetch from ftp://ftp.scriptics.com/pub/tcl/tcl8_1/.
Receiving tk8.1b1.tar.gz (2155552 bytes): 100%
2155552 bytes transfered in 17.1 seconds (123.28 Kbytes/s)
===> Extracting for tk-8.1.b1
>> Checksum OK for tk8.1b1.tar.gz.
===> tk-8.1.b1 depends on shared library: tcl81.1 - not found
===> Verifying install for tcl81.1 in /usr/ports/lang/tcl81
>> tcl8.1b1.tar.gz doesn't seem to exist on this system.
>> Attempting to fetch from ftp://ftp.scriptics.com/pub/tcl/tcl8_1/.
Receiving tcl8.1b1.tar.gz (2112258 bytes): 100%
2112258 bytes transfered in 17.0 seconds (121.16 Kbytes/s)
===> Extracting for tcl-8.1.b1
>> Checksum OK for tcl8.1b1.tar.gz.
===> Patching for tcl-8.1.b1
===> Applying FreeBSD patches for tcl-8.1.b1
===> Configuring for tcl-8.1.b1
creating cache ./config.cache
checking for ranlib... ranlib
checking whether cross-compiling...
....SNIP....
Again note, one command: "make install" is all the is needed.
: Compare that to Debian.
I have. See above. Debian is good, ports is better.
: I go into deselect, select slrn, for example, it automatically selects
: slang for me if it isn't installed and gives me the option of choosing
: slrn-pull or not. It was real nice installing the GIMP. I picked GIMP,
: all of the require libraries were selected for me, I chose a few extra
: things which were useful and less than a minute later it was installed.
And the difference is, what exactly?
: Let's compare ports, eh?
Lets.
: make gimp, whoops, need GTK. CD to that directory, make that. Whoops, it
: needs something else. CD to that directory make it. OK, done with those.
: make gimp again. Whoops, needs something else. Repeat for about 5-7
: libraries.
*BULLSHIT*
Make install in gimp will do all the above for you, downloading the
packages automatically off the 'Net if it doesn't have the tar balls
locally.
All you have is baseless FUD.
: Once those are installed you have the base GIMP. But wait, I'm glossing
: over the fact that we're not installing anything, we're downloading and
: compiling it!
That's a feature, not only of FreeBSD but of Unix in general. It is
an age old feature as well, handed down since Unix version 1. Unix
software is distributed most commonly in *source* code form and for
good reason (see Windows).
: Hey, it's great that you can do that, and Debian should be able to let
: people to do that, but I don't think that EVERY program installed needs to
: be compiled locally.
And you don't have to:
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/packages
: There simply is no need for a local compile unless you're looking for a
: specific optimization on some application that you need to run for
: critical use.
One word, "libc". Linux above all else should know the pain of not
building from source.
: I've compiled and installed slrn/slang by hand many times on many
: different systems. You know what, I see no difference from the
: precompiles one I get through Debian save that it is faster, easier and
: cheaper.
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/packages/news/slrn-0.9.5.4.tgz
: Ports is a throwback to a bygone era. It is good that it is there, it
: SHOULD be there. But it should not be regarded as the end-all, be-all way to
: do things.
TMTOWTDI
see packages
: It should be one OPTION of doing things to make it easy for those who need
: to do it that way, or want to do it that way.
see packages
: But to make it a requirement, to say it is the *BEST* is a big, fat JOKE.
Actually, for stability, consistency, ease of use, and legal
reasons, it *is* thus far the best system going.
Now FUD troll, go home.
--
-Zenin ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
My code is filled with comments! It's just that my comments are
written in Perl.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco Anglesio)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU reeks of Communism
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 20:33:57 GMT
On 13 May 1999 15:52:00 -0400, Greg Yantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>This is a really good point. It tends to boil down to whether or not
>economics is a zero-sum game. Fortunately, it's not, quite. Free trade,
>competition and advancing technology all tend to equate to there being
>more and more wealth over time to compete for.
You are using, I think, the wrong terminology. It certainly isn't a
zero-sum game, and certainly not in the classical sense, because A does
not lose at the same time that B gains, so as to produce a net economy of
zero. (Which is patently false - the economy exists and grows over time).
Using a time of arbitrarily small duration, however, you can assume that
the economic growth during this period is sufficiently close to zero to
use such principles. Which aren't socialist ones; they're classically
capitalist ones. Nor does such a model preclude the existence of economic
growth, just like a snapshot doesn't preclude the existence of motion.
>That and one big problem with communism is that the economic "pie"
>doesn't get larger over time. Everyone stays that poor forever. In a
Why not? Why shouldn't it get larger over time?
There are no reasons why it shouldn't; even the Soviet Union, despite its
inefficiencies, had a stunning growth in production (if you read your
history, the Soviet Union prior to 1917 was an agrarian economy and a
basketcase at that). War economies, which operate on command rather than
demand principles, tend to be periods of incredible economic growth.
The first economy to emerge from the great depression was a socialist one
(Sweden, in 1934, spent its way out of the depression); the second was a
war economy (Germany), and the west as whole only really emerged when they
moved onto a war footing themselves.
Even in the US, government spending has produced quite spectacular
regional booms. California, for example, absorbed untold billions of
military spending during the Reagan era.
War economies or command economies in general are not necessarily
sustainable in the long term, of course, but that isn't to say that
they're unsuccessful. They're very good at what they're good at - stoking
the fires of the state.
marco
--
,--------------------------------------------------------------------------.
> Marco Anglesio | Love is a perky elf dancing a merry <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | little jig and then suddenly he turns <
> http://www.the-wire.com/~mpa | on you with a miniature machine gun. <
> | --Matt Groening, Life in Hell <
`--------------------------------------------------------------------------'
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco Anglesio)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU reeks of Communism
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 20:05:37 GMT
On Thu, 13 May 1999 19:42:46 GMT, Peter Seebach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>By succeeding, you generally create more opportunities for others to succeed.
>Meanwhile, you are failing to distinguish between "result" and "opportunity".
>Does the fact that only one person wins a sweepstakes mean the others "had no
>chance"?
The world isn't a pick with replacement; if you're taking up a greater
than average share of the economy, it's obvious that there are less
dollars to be received by other people. An obvious truth that is obscured
by the sheer size of a national economy, it seems superficially clear that
there are enough dollars out there for everyone. Unfortunately, that's not
so: there *aren't* enough dollars out there for everyone.
Consider this metaphor: we're playing poker with a standard, well-shuffled
deck. You pick up an ace in your hand on deal. What are the chances that
I'm going to get an ace in mine? Let's say you get all aces in your hand -
what are the chances I get an ace in mine?
>It's not pure luck. I'm sorry, but I've seen too many talented people
>not try and fail, and too many talented people try and succeed, to believe
>that effort isn't counting for a lot.
Effort certainly counts for a lot. It is not the be-all and end-all of
success, though; when it comes down to contributing factors, effort is a
pathetically small fraction of what it takes to rise economically. Perhaps
it's the last 10% of the path to fame and riches - but that neglects the
role of the prior 90.
To rejoin our metaphor above, the deck is rarely "fair"; it is almost
always stacked one way or another. Giving someone the freedom to try and
play well with a stacked deck, as libertarians do, is not exactly the best
definition of freedom that I could possibly come up with.
marco
--
,--------------------------------------------------------------------------.
> Marco Anglesio | Psychoanalysis is that mental illness <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | for which it regards itself a therapy. <
> http://www.the-wire.com/~mpa | --Karl Kraus <
`--------------------------------------------------------------------------'
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Colin Watson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Scrolling continues long after releasing arrow button
Date: 13 May 1999 21:00:09 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Dave Apman <dave.apman[at]boeing.com> wrote:
> This is an extremely anoying problem I experience in a number of
> (all?) applications on my Suse 6.1 linux system. When I press and
> hold the down arrow to scroll the text in a vi editor session, the
> text scrolls properly, but when I let go of the arrow, the text
> keeps scrolling for many seconds as if a whole bunch of button
> events are queued up and being processed. I suspect this is a kernel
> problem since I see the same problem in nedit(an X/lesstif editor).
Does this happen at the console too? If not (as I suspect), it's an X
problem. My /etc/XF86Config has a line in the "Keyboard" section which
says "AutoRepeat 500 5", which works fine for me; try tweaking this
and see what happens.
Colin
--
"Go not to Usenet for counsel, for they will say both
'No' and 'Yes' and 'Try another newsgroup'." - Usenet Rule #17
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.networking
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jennifer Radtke)
Subject: Call for Papers: 1999 Atlanta Linux Showcase
Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 22:08:14 GMT
=================================
3rd Annual ATLANTA LINUX SHOWCASE
October 12-16, 1999
Cobb Galleria, Atlanta, Georgia
http://www.linuxshowcase.org
=================================
The Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts, in cooperation with the USENIX Association
and Linux International, is pleased to announce the 3rd Annual Atlanta
Linux Showcase.
In 1999, the Atlanta Linux Showcase will feature three conference tracks
over three days with 40 speakers discussing the technical and business
issues concerning the Linux Operating System. In addition, an Exhibition on
October 14-16 with over 140 vendors, will showcase the latest industry
products for Linux. USENIX will sponsor a Tutorial program on October
12-13. With the attention Linux has garnered in recent months, we expect
over 4000 attendees.
ALS is a forum that brings together both experts and peers in our field. We
invite you to submit paper proposals to enhance the invited talks,
tutorials, and Birds-of-a-Feather sessions. ALS is seeking papers that
demonstrate Tools, Tutorials, or Case Studies in the areas of:
Kernel
Program Development
Networking
Applications
Business Solutions
Usability
Security
Unusual Applications
Important Dates for Submissions
Submission deadline: July 1, 1999
Notification to authors: July 15, 1999
Camera-ready papers due: September 8, 1999
Papers should contain 1500 to 5000 words. After acceptance, papers may be
edited for clarity and temporal changes until September 8, 1999.
Accepted papers will be shepherded through an editorial review process by a
member of the program committee.
Selected papers will be included in the Conference proceedings, distributed
to attendees and also be available from USENIX once the conference ends.
At least one author will present the paper at the Showcase. Paper
presentations will have approximately one hour including Q&A.
Financial assistance for speaker travel and accommodations is available.
ALS requests that if your employer or other sponsor can cover some or all
of these expenses, they do so. Speakers will receive free admission to the
Showcase and an invitation to the welcome dinner Wednesday evening.
Details of how and where to send submissions may be found at
http://www.linuxshowcase.org
------------------------------
From: Frank Riha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: PCMCIA modem won't work
Date: 10 May 1999 20:25:03 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> If you take a look at /var/log/messages you should see a message
> indicating that this card is unsupported. At least that's what I see as I
> have the same modem. I tried upgrading to pcmcia-cs v3.09 and I am still
> getting the message that this card is unsupported. I'm not sure where to
> post to ask to have this card supported.
>
PCMCIA development has some news forums. Check there, recent
announcements and such:
http://hyper.stanford.edu/~dhinds/pcmcia/forums.html
Good place to start.
frank
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Subject: Re: car mp3 player
Date: 13 May 1999 18:22:12 GMT
On 13 May 1999 18:05:11 GMT,
David L. Bilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +-----On 13 May 1999 17:26:14 GMT, brian moore spoke unto us:----------
> | Actually, I'm pondering something similar (but in the case of a
> | circa-1986 CD player that I need to retire :)).
>
> | You won't find a ready-to-go kit for this: there isn't a standard for
> | keypads or lcd displays, so you'll have to piece things together.
>
> Actually, I found a nice bit of software at http://cajun.current.nu
> It drives an Orbital Matrix LCD and a keypad...very nice
Hrrrm... nifty. Will have to wander that page some more. (My interest
is more in home than car, but much of the hardware is the same -- I just
have heat as the main problem instead of power. :))
> | I'm presently in search of a decent P120 or so board with audio and
> | ethernet (what good is a home CD player if you can't telnet to it?).
> | I've sent off mail to a few companies requesting prices (hit altavista
> | and look for things like "+embedded +pentium +audio") but haven't got a
> | response yet.
>
> | Have you gotten a solution to the hardware problems like a decent cpu
> | board (Pentium class or StrongArm)?
>
> Yes. Check out the Adaptec PCM 5862 (Pentium with everything, including
> sound, vga/lcd output, ethernet, etc.--all in 5.25"). You can get it from
> http://www.ucs.co.uk.
Looks like they're in the midst of redoing their web pages... will look
for that part number though.
I've been looking at various other boards (usually PC104) like
http://www.axiomtek.com/Products/EmbeddedPC/SBC8354VEA/sbc8354VEA.html
and http://www.technoland.com/tl-embsbc500.htm
But so far, they've not responded to my requests for prices.
--
Brian Moore | "The Zen nature of a spammer resembles
Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker | a cockroach, except that the cockroach
Usenet Vandal | is higher up on the evolutionary chain."
Netscum, Bane of Elves. Peter Olson, Delphi Postmaster
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU reeks of Communism
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Seebach)
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 20:46:20 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Marco Anglesio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The world isn't a pick with replacement; if you're taking up a greater
>than average share of the economy, it's obvious that there are less
>dollars to be received by other people.
If you create more wealth, and you keep some of it, there's still more wealth
elsewhere, too.
In general, successes are caused by inefficiencies in markets, or are a
result of creating wealth. The former are generally a result of intervention
or short-term fluctuations; the latter actually improve things for everyone.
>An obvious truth that is obscured
>by the sheer size of a national economy, it seems superficially clear that
>there are enough dollars out there for everyone. Unfortunately, that's not
>so: there *aren't* enough dollars out there for everyone.
There will be as soon as people stop whining and create some more value.
>Consider this metaphor: we're playing poker with a standard, well-shuffled
>deck. You pick up an ace in your hand on deal. What are the chances that
>I'm going to get an ace in mine? Let's say you get all aces in your hand -
>what are the chances I get an ace in mine?
Very low.
Let's say I start printing aces. While I may end up with a dozen to your
four, you can still have more than you might have otherwise.
>Effort certainly counts for a lot. It is not the be-all and end-all of
>success, though; when it comes down to contributing factors, effort is a
>pathetically small fraction of what it takes to rise economically. Perhaps
>it's the last 10% of the path to fame and riches - but that neglects the
>role of the prior 90.
I don't agree. I think it's *much* more than 10%.
>To rejoin our metaphor above, the deck is rarely "fair"; it is almost
>always stacked one way or another. Giving someone the freedom to try and
>play well with a stacked deck, as libertarians do, is not exactly the best
>definition of freedom that I could possibly come up with.
You're allowed to print your own deck; that's one of the freedoms.
Don't like the existing business models? Make a new one.
-s
--
Copyright 1999, All rights reserved. Peter Seebach / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon!
Will work for interesting hardware. http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/
Visit my new ISP <URL:http://www.plethora.net/> --- More Net, Less Spam!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 04:41:41 -0700
From: jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: emulate a removable media
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> I want emunlate a floppy disk or a ZIP with a file or a partition,
> it is possible? and how ??
Say huh? You mean mount a file like it was a disk drive? Use loopback.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Philip Brown)
Crossposted-To: alt.solaris.x86
Subject: ext2 support for solaris now available
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 13 May 1999 17:38:38 GMT
here's a different kind of "dual-boot" for once: better integration between
linux and solaris x86 :-)
Sun(?) has just released a driver for the ext2 filesystem, under both
sparc and intel solaris. Additionally, it has improved "lxrun", to help folks
run linux binaries under solaris x86.
see
http://www.sun.com/software/linux/lxrun/
[erm.. although I haven't found the mentioned "ext2fs.tar.gz" file yet]
--
[Trim the no-bots from my address to reply to me by email!]
[ Do NOT email-CC me on posts. Pick one or the other.]
--------------------------------------------------
The word of the day is sescaquintillion
------------------------------
From: Greg Yantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU reeks of Communism
Date: 13 May 1999 17:28:18 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco Anglesio) writes:
>
> On 13 May 1999 15:52:00 -0400, Greg Yantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >This is a really good point. It tends to boil down to whether or not
> >economics is a zero-sum game. Fortunately, it's not, quite. Free trade,
> >competition and advancing technology all tend to equate to there being
> >more and more wealth over time to compete for.
>
> You are using, I think, the wrong terminology. It certainly isn't a
> zero-sum game, and certainly not in the classical sense, because A does
> not lose at the same time that B gains, so as to produce a net economy of
> zero. (Which is patently false - the economy exists and grows over time).
Thank you for proving my point.
It was, in fact your original implication that when one person succeeds,
he does so only by depriving others of their share of the total wealth,
that one can only get rich by exploiting others, a situation rather like
an economic zero-sum game. This is false. Sure, you can get rich by
exploiting others, but it isn't necessarily so.
My counter is that in succeeding, a person is probably doing something
right. Maybe making a cool new product, maybe pioneering an efficient
new manufacturing method... Therefore it is certainly possible that
by succeeding, you only increase the wealth and opportunity available
to everyone.
> Using a time of arbitrarily small duration, however, you can assume that
> the economic growth during this period is sufficiently close to zero to
> use such principles. Which aren't socialist ones; they're classically
> capitalist ones. Nor does such a model preclude the existence of economic
> growth, just like a snapshot doesn't preclude the existence of motion.
A possible dilemma is that if your chosen time duration is small enough
for economic growth to be indistinguishable from zero, the time period
is also small enough for nobody to be able to get rich.
> >That and one big problem with communism is that the economic "pie"
> >doesn't get larger over time. Everyone stays that poor forever. In a
>
> Why not? Why shouldn't it get larger over time?
There is no incentive to increased efficiency and growth. Think
"collective agriculture". There may be (and were) effects from increased
technology, but that is outside the scope of our discussion.
> There are no reasons why it shouldn't; even the Soviet Union, despite its
> inefficiencies, had a stunning growth in production (if you read your
> history, the Soviet Union prior to 1917 was an agrarian economy and a
> basketcase at that). War economies, which operate on command rather than
> demand principles, tend to be periods of incredible economic growth.
Compare the Kulak period to the results of the collectivization
when the Kulaks were liquidated.
> War economies or command economies in general are not necessarily
> sustainable in the long term, of course,
My point.
> but that isn't to say that they're unsuccessful. They're very good
> at what they're good at - stoking the fires of the state.
Certainly.
-Greg
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (octet)
Subject: best distribution
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 20:14:23 GMT
I'm pretty new to Linux and would like to get some opinions from you
folks. This is because I'm thinking about rolling out many Linux
workstations to replace Windows workstations.
1. Which distribution is the oldest?
2. Which one is the "technically" best distribution right now?
3. Which one is the best "over-all" distribution right now?
Thanks.
------------------------------
From: Alex Kaufman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: best distribution
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 17:31:08 -0400
> 1. Which distribution is the oldest?
Slackware IIRC
> 2. Which one is the "technically" best distribution right now?
Suse 6.1
> 3. Which one is the best "over-all" distribution right now?
The new Mandrake 6 is looking good, the best one for beginners IMO.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.misc) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Misc Digest
******************************
